August 29, 2008

This one's for you Rich

In lieu of all of the calls for more civility from Abanes & Co., Inc., I think Phil Johnson must have created this new Pomotivator (click image to be taken to full size version on Phil's site):

August 26, 2008

Slice of Phoenix Preacher

I realize this post needs editing for flow and whatnot but I don't have time right now. Kids, getting ready for school etc. just got back from a trip... so hopefully it's not too convoluted:

http://phoenixpreacher.com/cms/?p=3304

Phoenix Preacher has decided they don't like anyone calling them on the carpet for their tolerance of hateful people like Richard Abanes who serves as online apologist for his friend Rick Warren. Rick Warren, despite his personal conservative theology (It's A Personal Thing...a la Steve Taylor) is one of the most liberalizing influences on the church today, due to his watered down preaching and teaching to the general public AND to the Saddleback "Crowd."

Abanes claims in a rather generic way-- in spite of which generic phrasing we are ALL supposed to know exactly WHO he is talking about -- regarding discernment ministries
Not surprisingly, such a perspective is also often linked to an extremist end-time obsession that acts as fertile ground for the planting, watering, and harvesting of all kinds of conspiracy theories related to such things as the Antichrist, the Great Apostasy, and the so-called coing One World Government.
If Richard didn't mean it toward Ingrid and Ken, then he should learn to write more clearly and quit blaming others for misunderstanding him - but then he learned from the best -- Rick Warren does the same thing. They just point you in the right direction and let you make your own inferences (after pushing you right to the last step with their false rhetoric).

I can take Richard's own words and apply them to Rick Warren with minor changes and have it be far truer:

Not surprisingly, such a watered down perspective is also often linked to an extremely liberal obsession with undermining Scripture that acts as fertile ground for the planting, watering, and harvesting of all kinds of false doctrine related to such things as Social Justice, Dominionism, The Jesus Seminar, and the so-called "Peace Plan."

Abanes claims that "such ministries" (whatever that means) provides fertile ground for all the things he doesn't like. But he won't accept the idea that Rick's approach and public teaching (saying nothing about his 'inner circle' teaching, which only benefits a very small number of people by definition) can have the same effect. Imagine that... a double standard.

I am not arguing that if Ingrid and Ken were actually teaching what is false, that they could not be characterized this way. But that is not the case. Ingrid and Ken make solid Biblical cases for their positions. R Abanes does not, nor does Rick Warren (PDL is just the tip of the iceberg) and it is THAT which provides fertile ground for all kinds of error. It is not the 'us vs them mentality' or anything else he lists. It is FALSE TEACHING which gives rise to everything else, even the legitimately bad things Richard has issues with. THAT IS WHY it is so crucial that we actually correct false teaching! And yet these people would silence those that expose false teaching, calling them divisive. In effect they are allowing exactly what they say they do not want.

So anyway now Phoenix Preacher demands an apology from Ingrid Schlueter for her saying they were an emergent blog -- as far as I can see, since I have occasionally read posts there, is for their refusal to distance themselves from false teachers such as many of the Emergents, and in particular the internet bully Richard Abanes. Waaah! Cry me a river. If all Ingrid said was this little throwaway line, it seems (if it is not true) that PhoenixPreacher's reaction is a bit extreme. He can take extreme positions regarding Ingrid but I have yet to find an extreme condemnation of Emergent jello-theology. That tells me a lot. He condemns Richard Oakland for disagreement on some secondary things, but says mildly that Doug Pagitt has some 'interesting thoughts' on theology although he just can't buy what Pagitt says 'as a whole.' It's kind of like reading Scot McKnight's blog.

But Richard can with impunity associate discernment ministries (which he unapologetically condemns as hateful and divisive specifially and by name elsewhere) with David Koresh. Are you OK wih that Michael of PhoenixPreacher? No demands for apologies from Richard? If you are being mischaracterized it's your own fault for refusing to take a stand against bullies like Richard Abanes.

All issues — ALL ISSUES — are settled via an analysis that begins and ends with: “Is this person for, or against, Rick Warren.”.

Richard is projecting here.

Of course, that is also a lie and no one calls Richard on it. If you are concerned about being misrepresented as a pro-emergent blog perhaps you should reevaluate your acceptance of such silliness as Abanes puts out. He can post there with impunity, and THAT is what calls Michael Newnham's blog's status into disrepute. You have no right to demand an apology unless you castigate Richard for his lies. Perhaps you should do some biblical analysis of his writings to prove you believe what you say you believe. A Calvinist conservative blog would NOT tolerate the semi-pelagian teachings of Rick Warren, nor put up with Abanes' vociferous and unbiblical defense of such teachings.
Abanes: Ingrid then hosted a radio program in which she raised the alarm bells of persecution far and wide, declaring that I was basically attacking all Bible-believing Christians.
Bible Believing Christians are more and more coming to see the elephant in the Purpose Driven Living Room. So yes, you are in effect doing that more and more. That seems to be the case she is making.

Christians who have become obsessed/fixated on such issues at the expense of clear thinking, rational analysis of world events, and care/caution when making pronouncements about people within the Body of Christ with whom they might disagree on any number of issues.
Richard on the other hand can go ahead and make his pronouncements quite a bit including pronouncements about how much care and caution the people HE disagrees with have put into making those pronouncements. He can read their minds of course. And of course, he is the final arbiter of what constitutes clear thinking. On the other hand, anyone who has read The Fallacy Detective won't have much trouble finding quite a few good examples of fallacious reasoning in Richard's diatribes.

Did Richard miss the part in the Crosstalk in question where they talked about some of his good apologetics work and how it breaks their hearts to see him go off this way? It was at the beginning AND the end. Yeah, he must have. I'm sure with his exhortation to everyone to have an even handed approach he would have brought that up otherwise. (that's a little sarcasm there, in case he missed THAT too.) He and Michaek didn't miss the part about Phoenix Preacher being an emergent blog (that has to have taken up a full 1 seconds of the broadcast).

Ironically, the radio show by Ingrid was a PERFECT illustration of the very thing I alleged in the remark they were reading to their listeners!!!

Yeah, ironic isn't it? OH the irony of Richard Abanes accusing anyone of slander or libel or unBiblical rhetoric, or taking things out of context!

OH but of course he wasn't characterizing her (and Ken Silva by association), but a MINORITY ... yadda yadda yadda. Of course not! It's all rosy between him and Ingrid and Ken Silva who he (in those last couple of weeks he referred to in the original post) had tried to shut down.

Balderdash.

Richard your complete lack of critical thinking is starting to show. Are your book sales suffering because of its resultant damage to your reputation?

Is that perhaps why you feel compelled to start shutting down dissent? Since you seem impressed with using Bible verses to try and intimidate people, here is one for you

Proverbs 29:1 A man who hardens his neck after much reproof Will suddenly be broken beyond remedy.

I pray this will not happen to Richard Abanes, but that the Lord will grant him repentance and wisdom to see where he has erred and wounded the body of Christ, as well as nelected the wounds of sheep who have been injured by the Purpose Driven steamroller. My thoughts on Rick Warren and Abanes and others like them, while I pray that they find the truth, are very sad. I know that if they ever DO see the truth, it will devastate them with remorse. But I do pray for them to find it because the Truth is the only thing that sets a person free.

Michael of Phoenix Preacher wrote: Her theme was that Abanes rejected the second coming of Christ which is a complete lie.

I've listened to the show twice now, and I hear what he is complaining about here. But what Ingrid seemed to be saying is that Richard expressed disdain for the second coming of Christ with the paragraph she had read previously:
Not surprisingly, such a perspective is also often linked to an extremist end-time obsession that acts as fertile ground for the planting, watering, and harvesting of all kinds of conspiracy theories related to such things as the Antichrist, the Great Apostasy, and the so-called coing One World Government. An excellent book that discusses such matters is Selling Fear: Conspiracy Theories and End-Times Paranoia .
Richard, you're an author -- you KNOW that using the phrase "so called" means you are at BEST skeptical of the idea. It also calls into question the other things in that list as possible negotiables in the author's mind as well. If you are unaware of this, you should go back to writing school. In fact, I'll say it outright based on much of your other writing. You should go back to writing school. Or buy The Fallacy Detective and study it. (It's written to a young audience so you should have no trouble comprehending it.)

Of course, that kind of thing (taking things out of context) does happen even on Richard Abanes' public statements. Somehow, when Bob made one statement suggesting that privately Rick Warren agreed with him theologically, he said that Bob DeWaay was theologically in line with Rick Warren. It was enough for him to glowingly suggest that maybe there was a light at the end of this long dark tunnel and he was practically bursting with excitement.

Such fawning over Bob by Richard for his one somewhat conciliatory sounding comment (when if taken in the context of what Bob has said overall, is really damning RW with faint praise) has caused Bob no end of trouble. Anyone who's read this blog may remember that I was alarmed by it as well because I knew it would be taken as aid and comfort to the likes of the Purpose Driven crowd, due to their penchant for hearing only what they want to hear. (2. Tim 4:3)
Apparently the original light was a figment of Richard's rather overactive imagination. No hope for constructive discussions.. hmm.. kind of sound like the people he was referring to in the quote Ingrid took issue with on her show. He went on to say about Ingrid after the show:
You cannot reason with these people. You cannot have intelligent, thoughtful, honest, civilized, open discussions with them. They are living, it seems, in a world/reality of their own making where black has become white, up is down, right is left, yes means no, and vice versa.
So if he was NOT thinking about Ingrid ALREADY, this sudden 'turn' by Ingrid would certainly not prompt him to make such a pronouncement so quickly, without great care and caution!
Abanes: who have become obsessed/fixated on such issues at the expense of clear thinking, rational analysis of world events, and care/caution when making pronouncements about people within the Body of Christ with whom they might disagree on any number of issues. Such persons have, in my opinion, lost all perspective and have launched a Holy Heresy Hunting Crusade that sees:

1) the Antichrist and his minions all around them (going so far as to make it a habit of falsely accusing the brethren of heresy),

2) false teachings in nearly every word spoken by anyone with whomever they might disagree on non-essential issues, and

3) enemies in those whom they should consider fellow believers.
Oh... the Irony...examine yourself to see whether you are in the faith.

Now, since Richard has threatened anyone who reproduces his emails with criminal prosecution, no one is allowed to verify his obnoxious mean spirited and threatening behavior that he partakes in privately. When someone dares to disobey King Richard on this, he dutifully strains out his gnat and swallows the camel by complaining that they have reproduced his email unlawfully. (never mind what offensive behavior his email contains). Of course, he has people like Kathi who posts on his blog, convinced that it is Ingrid who bullies by having an opinion (rather than Richard who tries to use the legal system to shut people down for disagreeing).

I am being completely serious when I say I would like to know are we to honestly deal with someone like this, (ANYONE like this not just Abanes) If it is not to shine the light of truth on it? People say "do Matthew 18" with people who personally offend or threaten. The person being confronted, before 'two or three witnesses", "elders" or "the whole church" can be brought into the picture, screams bloody murder and pushes the 'gossip' alarm on the plaintiff and effectively stops the Biblical process. If the plaintiff goes ahead and follows Matt 18, the defendant continues to scream "slander!" "Libel!" etc. and "you posted my private email!"
Abanes: CONTRARY to what Ingrid and her guest implied, I have NEVER categorized as “extreme” any legitimate, biblically acceptable eschatology
Oh that is choice. It's the same tactic that Evolutionists use to defend which Scientists are truly "scientific." Only those they deem 'legitimate.'

Richard just said they were one step away from people like David Koresh. OH yeah, THAT's not extreme. I'm sure Jim Wallis and Barak Obama (all us people are clinging to our God and our guns!) would be happy with your "Official statement." I'll quote the pertinent segment again here:
Abanes: such a perspective is also often linked to an extremist end-time obsession that acts as fertile ground for the planting, watering, and harvesting of all kinds of conspiracy theories related to such things as the Antichrist, the Great Apostasy, and the so-called coing One World Government. An excellent book that discusses such matters is Selling Fear: Conspiracy Theories and End-Times Paranoia .
Nope, no extreme language there! Suuuure Richard. What color is the sky in your world again?
were in reference to a “minority” of Christians who have become obsessed/fixated on such issues at the expense of clear thinking, rational analysis of world events,
OH then you have no problem with people like Ingrid and Ken then! Great! You can take back all your threats against them! Hooray! Maybe there's at last a light at the end of this long dark tunnel we have been stumbling through! Wonderful!


Now hear this! Richard Abanes has said he did not mean Ingrid when he wrote those words about 'isolationist mentality' etc. -- so he has no problem with Ingrid and Ken and other Online Discernment Ministries! I am so glad to hear that Richard. It's obviously only people like Shirley Phelps and her daddy that he was talking about!

And in the same vein, As I mentioned on Phoenix Preacher, Rick Warren has publicly distanced himself from and denounced bad behavior done in the name of Rick Warren and Purpose Driven. He agreed it was bad and that he could not be held responsible for it. I would say that this applies to Richard Abanes and basically, Rick has thown Richard under the bus, as well as all pastors who usher Purpose Driven dissenters out the door.

some reviews of Beth Moore

Someone recently asked me about Beth Moore and what are the concerns about her very popular teaching.  She never was attractive to me, in her teaching.  It's very 'pull yourself up by your bootstraps" and "try harder" (as Todd Wilken says in his EXCELLENT audio review which was almost LOST to us thanks to LCMS, Inc.).


(added 8-31-08)Kim from Upward Call's assessment of Beth Moore's "The Patriarchs"
http://theupwardcall.blogspot.com/2007/12/early-retirement.html

KFUO WMA audio KFUO MP3 audio Hr.3
“A Review of Beth Moore’s Teaching ‘Building New Walls’”
http://issuesetcarchive.org/mp3/IE%202007_02_19%20Hr3.mp3

Southern Baptist Bible Teacher Beth Moore
http://christianresearchnetwork.com/?p=1927

15,000 Women Prepare for Beth Moore
http://christianresearchnetwork.com/?p=970

you can read an excerpt of an article on her here at Modern Reformation by Susan Disston.  You can get a 30 day trial and free issue, in order to read the rest. Or subscribe outright! (it's a good magazine!)

August 23, 2008

Nasty

Oops that was the subject line of  MR. Abanes' email to me.  I hope I don't get sued for copyright infringement.

Anyway, I shall forge ahead and live dangerously and use the word again: the word he chose to address me with --  nasty, along with a very nice email from a reader admonishing me quite lovingly to be more positive, brought to mind a passage from CS Lewis' Mere Christianity which always blesses me from his chapter "Nice People or New Men" so I think I will post it here.  I don't think I have posted it before -- at least I cannot find it in the archives.  Perhaps it is in something from the old site that I haven't brought over yet. Keep in mind that the entire chapter that this is taken from does expose some of his inclusivist leanings, which I do reject, although I do see the point he may have been trying to make (that the Holy Spirit may be drawing people we do not suspect are interested in Christ).

If you have sound nerves and intelligence and health and popularity and a good upbringing, you are likely to be quite satisfied with your character as it is. 'Why drag God into it?' you may ask. A certain level of good conduct comes fairly easily to you. You are not one of those wretched creatures who are always being tripped lip by sex, or dipsomania, or nervousness, or bad temper. Everyone says you are a nice chap and (between ourselves) you agree with them. You are quite likely to believe that all this niceness is your own doing: and you may easily not feel the need for any better kind of goodness. Often people who have all these natural kinds of goodness cannot be brought to recognize their need for Christ at all until, one day, the natural goodness lets them down and their self-satisfaction is shattered. In other words, it is hard for those who are 'rich' in this sense to enter the Kingdom.

It is very different for the nasty people--the little, low, timid, warped, thin-blooded, lonely people, or the passionate, sensual, unbalanced people. If they make any attempt at goodness at all, they learn, in double quick time, that they need help. It is Christ or nothing for them. It is taking up the cross and following--or else despair. They are the lost sheep; He came specially to find them. They are (in one very real and terrible sense) the 'poor': He blessed them. They are the 'awful set' He goes about with--and of course the Pharisees say still, as they said from the first, 'If there were anything in Christianity those people would not be Christians.'

There is either a warning or an encouragement here for every one of us. If you are a nice person--if virtue comes easily to you--beware! Much is expected from those to whom much is given. If you mistake for your own merits what are really God's gifts to you through nature, and if you are contented with simply being nice, you are still a rebel: and all those gifts will only make your fall more terrible, your corruption more complicated, your bad example more disastrous. The Devil was an archangel once; his natural gifts were as far above yours as yours are above those of a chimpanzee.

But if you are a poor creature--poisoned by a wretched upbringing in some house full of vulgar jealousies and senseless quarrels--saddled, by no choice of your own, with some loathsome sexual perversion--nagged day in and day out by an inferiority complex that makes you snap at your best friends--do not despair. He knows all about it. You are one of the poor whom He blessed. He knows what a wretched machine you are trying to drive. Keep on. Do what you can. One day (perhaps in another world, but perhaps far sooner than that) He will fling it on the scrap-heap and give you a new one. And then you may astonish us all--not least yourself: for you have learned your driving in a hard school. (Some of the last will be first and some of the first will be last). (C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity pp214-215).

I am one of the nasty people.  I am sure of that.  Christ help me, for I cannot help myself.  I admire people like the guys at CRN.(mis)info, Richard Abanes, etc, who never struggle with those cardinal sins -- feelings of anger or cynicism betrayal or jealousy, especially jealousy for the unpolluted Word of God.   I have a lump in my throat as I write that.  For whatever that's worth.

Yes, I am nasty sometimes.  Probably too often.  We laud Martin Luther for being hard hitting and going on for page after page with dripping sarcasm against Erasmus...we totally love how Amos called the women of Bashan COWS who sat around drinking wine and having their husbands wait on them.  Or Jeremiah condemning the "prophets" of Israel in his time. Jesus publicly maligning the leaders of the church of his day (e.g. the powerful leaders, not the little guys with small ministries) and calling them NAMES! *gasp* (Jesus used ad hominems?)

But people like Ken Silva, Chris Rosebrough, Ingrid Schlueter, etc, they are not allowed the same margins... even when they don't go anywhere near as far toward being provocative as some of the lauded heroes of the faith.

When a dog barks at an intruder, we don't scold him or chide him for being too noisy or upset or suspicious.  And we also wouldn't begrudge him being quiet and content in between calls of alarm would we?

On the contrary, 
“All ye beasts of the field, come to devour, yea, all ye beasts in the forest. His watchmen are blind: they are all ignorant, they are all dumb dogs, they cannot bark; sleeping, lying down, loving to slumber. Yea, they are greedy dogs, which can never have enough, and they are shepherds that cannot understand: they all look to their own way, everyone for his gain, from his quarter. Come ye, say they, I will fetch wine, and we will fill ourselves with strong drink; and tomorrow shall be as this day and much more abundant” – (Is.56:9-12). “Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour” – (I Pet.5:8).

Abanes and his friends still out in la la land (UPDATED)

UPDATE AND CORRECTION after the original post.

A very bizarre attempt to make fun of a dear and stalwart Christian sister Ingrid Schlueter by other people who claim the name of Christ:

Rumors about Ingrid of Slice!

I can usually see the humor in even bad satire... because even bad satire (as well as all humor) has some grain of truth and relevance to the issue.  But none of that applies here.  This is like stuff boys did on the school bus in 2nd grade in a lame attempt to embarrass the girls.   Yeah, I remember getting bullied like that in elementary school too.  Most of the guys grew out of it by high school but there were always a few who refused to grow up even after we graduated.

hmm...

I guess in Richard's alternate universe where at the quantum physics level the law of noncontradiction doesn't apply, it makes sense.

The proper (well, maybe not proper, but rather EQUIVALENT/turnabout is fair play) response to this would be:


"yes, Richard Abanes confirms he does indeed still have two testicles"

or

"yes, Richard Abanes confirms he does NOT yet have low testosterone."

or even

"yes, Richard Abanes confirms he does NOT have prostate issues!"

Yes, I know, it's tasteless crude and insensitive.

UPDATE
Richard has whined to me in private (and of course because all his precious communications are copyrighted and I wouldn't want to bait him by using his email without permission, I cannot duplicate it here).  He suggested a few changes and he does have a point; he did not write the blog entry, only enjoyed it's tasteless humor thoroughly.  So I will make the change.
"yes, Itodyaso reports that Richard Abanes confirms he does indeed still have two testicles"
or
"yes, Itodyaso reports that Richard Abanes confirms he does NOT yet have low testosterone."
or even
"yes, Itodyaso reports that Richard Abanes confirms he does NOT have prostate issues!"
Yes, again, I know, it's still tasteless crude and insensitive. But Richard is right, it had to be corrected.

Flowers for Ingrid Schlueter from Ray Comfort

Well... Ray Comfort has spoken yet again publicly about the Word Faith conference debacle he was involved in.


I think she is right on.  After reading Ray's post above, I thought "he thinks he can appease women with flowers instead of dealing forthrightly with the problem?" and "what?  No flowers for Ken?  Maybe he couldn't figure out what kind he likes..."

The entire post seemed flippant -- like he was talking about something as irritating and embarrassing as having had a bad hair day or having been caught out in public with two different shoes on.

Ray's responses to this situation have been at best inadequate to deal with the gravity of the situation, as well as the harm he has caused to Ingrid and Ken's ministries by his perceived resistance to their admonition and by not rebuking his own Mark Spence's vitriolic responses to them both.  By simply not saying something along the lines of "Ken and Ingrid were right -- I should not have done this, and I neglected for several years to do anything about my association with this group.  For that I am sorry." makes Ingrid and Ken lose credibility in the eyes of many of Ray's supporters.  He has as much as admitted they were right but without doing anything to commend those two who stuck their necks out to warn them. 

Please, brother Ray, consider making restitution not with a bouquet of flowers, but with a public acknowledgement that you were in the wrong to have by your prolonged negligence given credibility to heretics even after it was brought to your attention, and by publicly lending your credibility now to those who speak the TRUTH -- by commending the brother(s?) and sister(s?) who tried to warn you, for their actions and naming their names with thankfulness.

That would show true humility.

Perhaps this is Jesus' way of saying it's time to consider severing ties from these heretics (including the slot on TBN) and trust him to further your ministry without compromise.  I would think it would be more in line with Christian integrity to broadcast on a secular station that doesn't pretend to be Christian.

I have to think that if Ray had not been at the Inspiring Excellence Conference, that Todd Friel would have been all over the audio of John Avanzini and his silly doctrine of 'reverse entrapment' and his 'magic rubbing stones' that can only be 'charged' with God's power by making a credit card donation in the amount of your mortgage payment.

But as it stands right now I doubt they will ever use that audio.  So... Avanzini, by association with Ray at that conference, in effect receives some amount of protection from receiving any more negative attention and being exposed as a false teacher on the radio show.

And Ray, if your message wasn't clear enough so that people can differentiate between your gospel and theirs and how they aren't compatible, you didn't preach it clearly enough.  If you were invited to speak at a heretical conference and keep being asked back, if your message itself didn't cause enough controversy (rather than Ingrid and Ken's warning to you causing the controversy) in the presence of such blatant heretics, then you didn't preach it clearly enough.

August 19, 2008

ChurchWatch on Youtube Sowing False Divisions

Video:

Redefining the Purpose Driven Life - Bob DeWaay


I have sent a complaint to Grace To You reporting that video as a copyright violation of John Macarthur's material. The audio from TwinCity Fellowship is also brutally butchered in editing and made to say what this person wants you to think it said, probably hoping you won't actually go and listen to the original.

Sad.

Then uses Macarthur to illustrate the error of PDL (his words were, admittedly, harder hitting) and make it look like Macarthur and DeWaay now disagree. Amazing. It looks like the kind of thing Richard Abanes would do what since he ran with Bob's original 'nice' post and decided that meant Bob was seeing the 'light' about PDL/PDC. Of course, the Saddlebackers are pretty much in the habit of taking everything out of context, courtesy of Rick Warren the King of bad hermeneutics. But hey, he's had six years of Greek and Hebrew so everything he says MUST be right!

How many years of English have you had Rick? You can't teach clearly in that language either.

August 12, 2008

CRN(mis)Info guys are insane!

Oops... is that libel?

here's their screed.  Sound like stalkers.  Wonder if someone could get harassment charges/libel charges filed against one Joe Martino for this?

and...


That they don't mind cutting off their nose to spite their face is astonishing.

If they were to win this frivolous case, they will be slitting their own opinionated throats.  Of course, they're of the OPINION that they never offend ANYONE.

August 6, 2008

The color of the sky in Abanes' world

One positive note before dumpster diving into the realm of Abanes again:

Ken Silva has a delightful sense of humor, a wonderful biting wit which is quite judiciously applied to the areas that need it, and at the same time, an approachability and care for the flock of God that is SO needed in the church today, and all too rare.  He has comforted me when I was struggling, even though, as he is not my pastor, he has no technical 'responsibility' for me.  I thank God for him and his true pastor's heart.  It is men like him, James Sundquist, Bob DeWaay, and others like them, that the church needs more of.  They have a real burden for outcasts, people who have found themselves alone after many years of faithful service to a church - simply because they wanted to continue to be faithful, while their church began to go astray.

I mention those three men specifically because those are the three who have personally encouraged me the most over these last few years as I have dealt with so much heartbreak, frustration and grief over the state of the church in general, and my ex-purpose driven church in particular.  Even Abanes would agree the state of the church in general is worthy of heartbreak and frustration, though he may not agree as to why it is in such a sorry state.

Ken  Silva is a true encourager, and yet isn't about to back down from a wolf who insists he/she is a sheep.  And he isn't going to cajole and sweet talk the wolf into leaving the sheep alone.  But then those who have never been shepherds wouldn't understand how beating off the wolf with your staff is actually the LOVING thing to do.

Back to Abanes.  Oh hang on, time to put on my gas mask...

Abanes, wonder of wonders, is STILL whining and playing the victim.  I wonder how long he can keep Todd Wilken in the dark about just what kind of game he's playing here.  He spent a few minutes at the beginning of his recent appearance on the new Issues Etc talking about how GLAD he was that they were back.  And yet, Richard Abanes, having less (like, ZERO) jurisdiction over Ken Silva than the LCMS did over Issues Etc., is attempting to do exactly what he rightly judged LCMS, Inc., to be in the wrong for doing to Issues, Etc.

I won't hold my breath for his beloved Rick Warren to give him a kindly word of advice (e.g. KNOCK IT OFF, YOU ARE DAMAGING YOUR OWN "REPUTATION") since Rick Warren says he can't be responsible for ANYONE else's behavior... (though he's fine with just letting them run around creating disasters in his name and not saying word one against them).

Here's the passive-aggresive game Abanes is playing.

Who did Abanes tell the specifics to and why did he cut out those directly involved out of the information loop? This doesn’t make a bit of sense. Doesn’t a person who has been accused of wrong doing have a right to know what charges they are being brought up on? Of course they do! That is why this whole fiasco is such a farce.

I stand by what I’ve already said. The reason Richard Abanes isn’t giving the specifics regarding his allegations of libel is because he cannot produce any real evidence to substantiate his claims that libel actually took place.
And,

I would submit that Abanes' entire goal is not so much to protect his own reputation (since it's hard to do that when you're shooting holes in your own rowboat...and blaming everyone else in the blogosphere for the resultant taking on of water) but that his main goal, if he were honest with himself and everyone else, is to attempt to destroy the reputation of Ken Silva's.  In harassing his and Rick Warren's detractors, the example he is making of Ken Silva will have the effect of silencing others who wish to critique Warren and Abanes' teachings.  Abanes has to have some hope that some opportunistic attorney will take on such a frivolous case.  After all, a lady made a whole boatload of cash suing McDonalds for damages when she spilled hot coffee on herself.

and from this story: Not So Fast Abanes, Did Ken Silva Really Break Federal Law?
“The form-mail template that I sent to IPOWER has never caused a problem—that is, until Ken Silva decided to blow it up into an issue of astronomical proportions by illegally pasting that PRIVATE email to IPOWER online in violation of federal copyright/privacy laws.

Why is no one complaining about him?

Let me reiterate that point, Ken Silva violated federal copyright/privacy laws by publicly posting my PRIVATE email to IPOWER,
Ah yes, Abanes' did not like that people found out about his behavior... and drat, now the CRN.info post is foiled which libelously suggested Abanes didn't do it and Ken was just creating a publicity stunt all on his own. Let me see, which is worse... posting someone's formal complaint email which was forwarded to him by his ISP (e.g. in effect exposing the deeds of darkness and obeying God rather than the man Richard Abanes), or trying to silence free speech? Hmmm.... I just can't decide!

It seems to me there was one group of people that Jesus talked about 'Straining at gnats and swallowing camels' but... just can't remember which group that was off the top of my head.... hmmm....

Abanes is going to have a hard time keeping friends if they are constantly worried that he may get upset if they repeat anything he has ever said/written.  I feel sorry for him.

Such great Christian behavior from the tolerant, "don't be divisive!" Purpose Driven crowd. Always amazes me how hypocrisy is (in varying degrees depending how much PD koolaid they've swallowed) a way of life for the legalists and moralists who follow the Purpose Driven Pope.  And yet, I shouldn't be surprised.

It's not that PD magically causes good pastors to turn into hypocritical power grabbers.  But PD gives marginal pastors carte blanche to set their own agenda (after all there is no good scriptural exegesis in PDC on figuring out what GOD'S AGENDA is for the church and discerning when YOUR agenda starts to encroach on GOD's) and run with it, accepting no correction.

And yes, Rick Warren CAN be held responsible for this behavior, because he teaches it in PDC himself and in articles he has written.  And he endorses it in Dan Southerland's "Transitioning" book, with his glowing foreword for that book and the Church Transitions agenda, which employs these techniques.  Chuck McAlister wrote a 6 part series on Transitioning the Established Church on pastors.com which also details how to do a hostile takeover in a church.

All of this of course goes unnoticed by Richard Abanes who it seems can only discern between such obvious difference as Mormonism and Christianity, but is too color blind to see the difference between MAN-Centered Christianity and Christ-Centered Christianity.  And apparently because Abanes cannot see it, it doesn't exist.  That's intellectual narcissism.

QUICK ! Rick Warren had better SUE the author of this article (Myles Brand: Why The Capitalism Argument on Pay for Play Doesn't Work) for copyright infringement! They used the phrase "purpose driven!"
(my apologies, it is a link to the Huffington Post... just so you're warned)

Psst---Pastor Ken--- better prepare yourself for...
THE COMFY CHAIR!